Transcript - Sky News Interview with Annelise Nielsen - Protecting WA's hard border
TELEVISION INTERVIEW
SKY NEWS WITH ANNELISE NIELSEN
THURSDAY, 30 JULY 2020
SUBJECT: WA hard border.
ANNELISE NIELSEN, HOST: For more on the Western Australian border battle I'm joined live now by Labor MP Patrick Gorman and Liberal MP Jason Falinski. Thank you both for your time. Let's go to you Patrick Gorman first, being the West Australian out there in Perth. Do you think the border should stay up?
PATRICK GORMAN, FEDERAL MEMBER FOR PERTH: Well I think the Prime Minister and his West Australian Liberal colleagues are seriously out of touch with Western Australians on this. It has been a successful policy. I one hundred percent support Mark McGowan's view that this is in Western Australia's interests and indeed in the national interest. It's enabled our mining companies to stay strong throughout this crisis. It has enabled Western Australia to help Victoria. They are literally flying swaps from Victoria over to WA and testing them to help keep Victorians safe. So, it is not in the national interest to tear down this border. And I am disappointed, as pretty much every West Australian I speak to about the Federal Government's view that they will go and assist Mr Palmer in this High Court case. It is hard to justify, and it has made Western Australians incredibly angry.
NIELSEN: Jason Falinski. One of the really hard-hit sectors at the moment has been all those FIFO workers trying to go in to WA to keep the economy going and then they get stuck in some pretty dire situations including some of them having to self-isolate. Do you think it is fair for WA to keep the border up when it's costing so much to so many people?
JASON FALINSKI, LIBERAL MP: Look I think the Prime Minister's view is not this is the view of the Federal Government, it's our view that this is what the High Court is likely to find, and we live in a country that is based on the rule of law not the rule of man or any individual for that matter. And I think the issue has always been from the beginning that Mark McGowan's stand on this has been very popular in Western Australia. There is no doubt that a lot of people like it but the problem that you continue to have is that it's not based on health evidence. So it may be possible to say we're going to close the border to certain hotspots where there've been outbreaks of COVID-19. But just to arbitrarily close the border to all other states and territories regardless of the health outcomes that they're having is not really a justifiable position for him to take. And I don't want to point the finger. I don't want to bring politics into this but at the end of the day you know we can have great health outcomes but we do know that if people don't have a sense of economic hope and opportunity or financial security then that also has an impact on their mental health. And it's very important that we're not just looking at what is a popular policy today but what will have an impact on our economy as we move forward. A lot of these states are able to make those decisions at the moment because the Commonwealth Government is picking up the tab through JobKeeper and JobSeeker. But when those policies begin tapering off, I'm very worried about the impact on individuals' financial circumstances.
NIELSEN: Patrick Gorman, that's an interesting point. WA was already feeling the pinch with the mining sector downturn and then this on top of everything else. Do you think that there is a mental health cost to the border staying up that is not being considered?
GORMAN: Well I think though also you've got to look at both sides of this. There will also be a mental health cost if the border is taken down and Western Australians have genuine fears about the health of them, their friends and family. But I wouldn't want to see what happens when Clive Palmer is the first person to bounce across the Western Australian border. The reception he would get, he’d be lucky it was just frosty. People are very angry about this High Court challenge. And on the point of the economy, Western Australia had some of the most relaxed restrictions for businesses of any state in the country. It has actually enabled our economy to continue to recover from this crisis quicker. And again, that's a good thing for the national economy. It means our mining companies are paying tax. It means that cafes are less likely to be reliant on JobKeeper come September, October, November, December. So Western Australia is doing its bit for the national economy and this is the best way Western Australia can contribute. And I just want to see a bit more cooperation. I don't want to see more op-ed pieces from Mathias Cormann lecturing Mark McGowan in the newspaper. I think a bit of co-operation rather than this kind of like, Scott Morrison, Clive Palmer, Mark McGowan fight it out in the High Court thing. You know, it's not what Australians want to see, and it's definitely what Western Australians want to see.
NIELSEN: That's an interesting point you raise about the politicisation of it, and we actually just had Ken Wyatt on, WA MP as well, saying that he actually supports the border staying up as well. So, it does show that it's not a universal agreement.
GORMAN: There's a split in Cabinet!
NIELSEN: I'll leave that. Interesting point you raise though, Jason Falinksi. You're saying that WA is not necessarily relying on health advice. This is the same argument being raised with Queensland now that they've decided to designate Sydney a hot spot. Do you think that the Queensland Government's politicising this as well?
FALINSKI: Look Annelise, so I'm inclined to say yes, but once again I don't want to politicise this. I mean we could be back here in three months’ time saying, "well doesn't the decision of the Premier of Queensland in retrospect look like a very good one". So, it's very easy for me to sit in a television studio and opine on whether this is a good idea or not. But what we can do is rely on the best advice that we have now and the advice is that it might be understandable for the Premier of Queensland to say "look, you know, there are parts of Sydney that if you've been to in the last 14 days you will need to isolate if you're coming to Queensland", but to close the entire border to the state of New South Wales seems like somewhat of a massive overreaction. I understand that it's popular. I understand that it looks like you're taking a very strong leadership stand when you do it. But I just urge people to think about three, six months down the track when JobKeeper, JobSeeker have started to taper off so the federal government is not picking up the bill for these businesses. And the business just simply isn't there because what looked like a good idea today was actually a terrible idea two or three months down the track. I'm just urging people to think about this very carefully, especially if you're a premier. And I think the point that Gladys Berejiklian made today which was, look, you know, Queensland benefits from people from New South Wales taking holidays in Queensland; it's not to the benefit of New South Wales, you know is a good one. And I really would urge premiers to do the right thing and to rely on the health advice that they have rather than playing to potentially people's fears and concerns.
NIELSEN: Patrick Gorman do you agree?
GORMAN: Well I think the argument around tourism is always about people saying, "come to Sydney, come to Sydney". It's not about actually in interests of the national tourism market. oI just think if you really want to lead by example, Jason, let's actually find the creative way to have Parliament sit. That for me I think is the thing that grates with a lot of ordinary Australians right now, is that you see politicians who could have the Parliament sitting next week, at the same time saying "oh, we can't do Parliament but we should definitely open the borders across the country". It just doesn't gel. There's not a consistency of approach from the government on this and it doesn't quite sit right with me that we're sort of saying "oh, you know we need to create jobs with the tourism sector. But we're not really doing our own jobs and go into Parliament". I think we can if we can lead by example that would be my preference.
NIELSEN: Jason Falinski, I do have to say, when you say that you're effectively locking out all of New South Wales by banning Sydney. Two million people live outside of the Sydney CBD, you're being a little Sydney-centric there aren't you?
FALINSKI: Sorry I don't understand your question, Annalise. So I'm saying that if the Queensland Government has said "look, there have been breakouts in parts of Sydney and therefore if you've been to those parts you need to isolate if you come into Queensland", that would make sense. But people outside of that, to close the border to everyone in New South Wales regardless of whether they may have been exposed to the virus, and the best health data we have now seems to be a bit perverse, is I suppose the best way I can put it. So, I think I'm being [inaudible] Sydney centric.
NIELSEN: I'm just being a proud Western Australian wanting to be fighting against the Sydney-centric approach too.
FALINSKI: Well you should have made that declaration up front, Annelise.
NIELSEN: I just want to see my mum but that's fine. We will leave it there, gentlemen. Thank you both for your time on this really important topic.
FALINSKI: Thank you, Annalise. Thanks Pat.
GORMAN: Thank you.
ENDS